§ 2.51 p.m.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government when they now expect to publish the results of all the various further studies on the Channel Tunnel to which reference was made in the Green Paper and, in the light of the debate in the Upper House, what is now the proposed timetable for the publication of a White Paper and for the First Reading of any relevant Bill.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, a summary of the results of the economic and financial studies was published by the British Channel Company last week; a fuller report will be available soon.
The full report of the study on the economic and social implications for Kent was published on Monday. Further material will be published as it becomes available. The Government will make 1199 known their views on these studies as soon as possible. If their view is that it would be worth proceeding to the next phase of the project, financial powers for that purpose will be sought from Parliament during the current Session.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, first may I ask about these reports resulting from these other studies. In what form are they being made available? In what form was this study made available on Monday? Is it being issued by the Government, or not? To what extent is Parliament being officially informed of these studies? That is the first question I wish to ask the noble Lord. My second point is that when he says Parliament will be asked to legislate within the current Session, my Lords, the Session may well go on until next October or November. Does the noble Lord mean October or November, or is he still sticking to the July date?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, as regards the noble Lord's first question I have a copy of the second report I referred to which I shall be glad to give to the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, if he has not already seen it. As regards the other studies mentioned, the likelihood now is that the results of these—and the results of all other studies needed—will be summarised and issued in one form or another by the Government before Parliament is asked to come to a decision about going to the second phase. The noble Lord will have seen from Chapter 9 that a target date of July 31 is mentioned, but in the same paragraph it is also mentioned that it may be possible for this date to be slightly postponed; and so far as the timetable is concerned, I have nothing to add at this stage.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I have read Chapter 9. It says that the target date is July 31, with the possibility of postponement. I have put down a Question now in order to get further information and to find out whether there is to be a further postponement. The point on which I am asking the noble Lord to be more precise is this: when all these various studies are collated and published by the Government, as apparently they are to be, together with comments by the Government, are we really to have time before Parliament is asked to approve any next step?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, it is the Government's hope and expectation that the programme we are working to can be fulfilled. But I would give the categorical assurance that Parliament will not be expected to take a decision or to grant further financial powers until the key results of the studies referred to have been assembled and made available, and time has been allowed for discussion in public as well as in Parliament.
§ LORD DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware, first, that we are grateful for the latter part of that answer? Secondly, is he aware that it is not good enough to say to any speaker from the Opposition Front Bench, or any other Front Bench, that a copy of a document will be available for him? Will these papers be available in the Printed Paper Office? Thirdly, when these studies are made may we be given some more information about a bridge, especially in view of the fact that British bridge builders have now won a £15 million contract for building over the Humber Estuary a bridge with a 4,266-foot span and with a four-lane toll way for traffic at the rate of 50,000 vehicles a day? May we have facts about whether British bridge builders also put in a contract for building a bridge over the Channel? There is no need to knock the Tunnel. Those two holes under the sea may be needed, but let us at least encourage the idea of a bridge for the future.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, we have had a whole debate on the Channel Tunnel and quite a bit of that strayed into the question of a Channel bridge, but this subject does not arise from the Question on the Order Paper today.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord to answer two further questions? First, today being May 23, is it possible to say quite categorically that Parliament is not going to be asked to take legislation through two Houses by July 31 when, as of this day, we have still to see the result of all these further studies? Secondly, may I ask the noble Lord whether these various studies, which he tells us are to be collated, will include an estimate of the capital cost of improving the rail access to the Tunnel from London; and to what extent will any development of the rail services to the 1201 Tunnel terminal be delayed as a result of the cuts announced yesterday which affect surface transport?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I can certainly confirm that the information which has to be laid before Parliament before it can take a decision about the next phase, and before it can be asked to grant any further financial powers, will include the scale and nature of railway investment and improvements to rail access between London and the Tunnel terminal. I cannot be more categorical than I was just now when I said that Parliament will not be expected to take a decision on either of these matters until the key results are available and time has been allowed for discussion. Of course, Parliament is sovereign on the question of whether it has been given enough time or not.
§ LORD SHINWELLMy Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Sandford, referred to the recent debate on the subject. Can he say whether the estimated cost has increased since that debate? Will he recall that the noble Lord, Lord Harcourt, made a statement which surprised Members of your Lordships' House, when he declared that the estimated cost had increased by about 100 per cent.? Can the noble Lord say whether there has been any increase in the estimated cost since that debate?
§ LORD SANDFORDNo, my Lords, there has not. What has happened is that the details of its computation have been published and are available for all to see.
§ LORD GRIMSTON OF WESTBURYMy Lords, will the studies include the estimated capital cost of converting British transport, bridges and so on in order that Continental rolling stock—I know it is the same gauge but it has wider load limits—can pass over the British railway system?
§ LORD SANDFORDYes, my Lords. That is one of the things included in by general remark that the scale and nature of railway investment for the improvement of access between London and the Tunnel terminal will be among the matters to be made available.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, can the Minister give any further information about whether the material facts required 1202 have yet been collated and published in a prescribed and readable form? If so, what information is still outstanding and not already in the hands of the Government?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I hope I understood the noble Lord, Lord Popplewell, right in thinking that he asked whether my right honourable friend now has from British Rail the information which he has asked for. The answer is, "Yes". It is being studied, collated, assembled and considered.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord; but, with all respect, it is now nearly 3 o'clock and we are still on our third Question. I know that this is an important matter and it rightly engages your Lordships' attention; but we debated it at length only three weeks ago. I would suggest, with deference, that perhaps it is now time we moved eastward to the Indian subcontinent.